On 3 April 2015 at 23:59, Kai Nacke via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote: > On Friday, 3 April 2015 at 18:04:14 UTC, deadalnix wrote: >> >> Also, what are the plan for GDC and LDC if we move toward DDMD ? > > > My plan with LDC is to use the CPP backend to produce a boot strap compiler > and then compile the D source. Much work... > > Regards, > Kai
Then we'd have to make sure that we never use any new compiler features added after the switch to D in the frontend. Otherwise the CPP sources in stage1 will need to be continually maintained alongside. I think a couple of things need doing that would really help here: 1. Push for getting binary packages to be built and hosted in distributor software repositories before the switch. ie: Packages for all supported targets on Archlinux, Debian, Fedora, OpenSUSE. This makes life easier for the package maintainers of each of those repos too, rather than have them go through a process of bootstrapping unsupported targets via a cross-compiler. 2. Test the following configurations on native host/target compilations (eg: x86 -> x86). host=dmd build=ldc host=dmd build=gdc host=ldc build=dmd host=ldc build=gdc host=gdc build=dmd host=gdc build=ldc In the absence of a D host compiler, downloading binaries of one D compiler should allow you to bootstrap any alternative D compiler. Regards Iain.